input stringlengths 93 39k | output stringlengths 1 117 |
|---|---|
Eric, I recieved a call from a guy with Pacific Interlink (?).
He is looking to market LNG in Europe.
Since I have very little knowledge in this area, I didn't get much specific information.
But, I told him I would find someone for him to talk with.
His name is Sam Kovacevich.
Phone: 847-971-3369.
I would appreciate it if you would give Sam a call.
If you aren't the person he needs to talk to, please let me know.
Thanks.
Daren Farmer Texas Desk - Gas
| LNG - Europe |
Rita, Since I was out of the office most of the week, I missed reading this e-mail.
I am open any afternoon this week except for Friday (all day) and Bob's staff meeting tomorrow (if we have it).
Let me know when you want to meet.
D
| REVISED-Tenaska IV-Cleburne Plant |
Hey Ken.
How are things going for you?
Is the market loving you?
We have been really busy.
We sold our house after 2 weeks on the market.
I don't think I had it underpriced.
I looked at the average $/sq ft for sales in our neighborhood for the last 6 months and I was pretty high above the average.
Anyway, we got what we wanted and made a little money, so we were happy.
Two days after we sold our house, Tonya found the one she wanted in Oaks of Devonshire.
It's over at Louetta and I-45, just before The Thicket.
It's a little bigger than we were looking for (3100 sq ft), but it's got a great game room/sunroom for the kids.
It was built in 86, so it needs a little work.
But that's ok with me.
Anyway, we are closing on both houses on Monday and moving Tuesday and Wednesday.
We will have you and Linda over for lunch or dinner one of these days.
We also had tubes put into Jake's ears this month.
We hated having to do that, but it has really made a difference.
He had a constant ear infection since October.
Now you can tell that he feels so much better.
He's learning more and more each day.
We have nothing that is "Jake proof".
Even those plastic locks you put on cabinets don't hold him.
He knows that if you keep yanking on the door over and over that it will eventually slip or break and then your in.
I'm going to install pad locks on the cabinets at the new house.
We'll see if that stops him.
Anyway, everybody's doing well.
I will be alot better after we finish this house business.
I don't feel so good when I'm writing all those checks.
Talk to you later.
D
| Howdy |
I have created a spreadsheet to assist in the tracking and booking of the gas supply related to Tenaska IV.
If you have suggestions or comments on the file, contact either me or Mark.
Megan - You can copy the Jan 01 Est tab and update the volumes with actuals.
The file should calculate the resulting settlement with Tenaska.
I will then update the demand fee on the deal ticket to true-up the month.
Since we haven't gone through actuals in the spreadsheet, we may have to do some tweaking with the formulas.
Anyway, this should give us a good start and you will be able to see where we closed the month in Logisitics.
The file is located in O/Logistics/Cleburne Plant/2001FuelMgmt.xls.
If you don't have access, we can look into creating a new location on the O drive.
The spreadsheet is attached for this month.
This is definitely a work in progress.
So, if you have ideas to make it easier, or if you need something added, let us know.
D
| Tenaska IV |
To forecast Entex: We have a database that contains the citygate volumes by day, with the low and high temps for each day.
When we get a weather report for the new day, we enter the projected low temp and the spread into the file.
The database is sorted by that information with a +/- 2 degrees on the temps, and provides an average volume for that criteria.
(For example: With temps of 40-60, the sort would produce a list of the volumes pulled for each day with a low of 38 to 42 degrees and a temperature spread of 20 to 22 degrees.
An average is then calculated from that volumetric data.
In this case, the average is calculated to 259,000 Mmbtu.)
Upon calculating the average, we then apply information we obtain through daily business and adjust that estimate.
Things to consider: if weather is cloudy or sunny, wet or dry; wind chill; Entex's obligation on Midcon; Entex's recent operating procedures; Entex takes versus our prior estimates (have we been under or overestimating volumes each day), etc.
Additionally, since we only see about 30% of the meters, we apply a factor to estimate the remaining 70%.
If we have an unaccounted volume for a few days that is fairly consistent (and we have determined that the ua4 has not been caused by something else), we may adjust the factor to bring the estimates more in line.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Daren
| Entex Forecasting |
Sandi, Do you have a complete contract for the Apache purchase under the Tenaska IV deal?
Apache is billing us a rate that is $.11 below the commodity rate stated on page 22 in the original contract.
In the documents I have, I can't find a reason for the adjustment.
I may be missing an amendment or something.
I thought that you may have a complete set of documents and could help me out.
Daren
| Tenaska IV |
Megan, I can meet with you on the Pan Energy Swap anytime Thursday or Friday afternoon.
Early afternoon usually works best for me.
I can come up to your desk if that is easier.
Let me know.
D
| Pan Energy Swap |
Luis, Please see the attachment.
This file shows deals that still need adjustment stemming from the base gas program being kicked off for Dec.
Please have these corrected also.
Thanks.
The "arranged_quantity" column contains the correct volume.
Daren
| Base Gas Roll |
Gary, The deal with Williams Terminals expired in Oct.
However, about 3,800 flowed for Nov. Do you need to renegotiate this deal for Nov. Or, do we roll it under the terminated k?
What do think about Dec?
D
| Nov 00 |
PW, HPL's spot and base purchases by zone for April 2000 are reported in the attached file.
Let me know if you have any questions.
D
| April 2000 spot supply |
JM, The message below is related to deal #138094.
According to Joan, October is the last month for this deal.
However, the evergreen flag is activated in Sitara and a new line has been created for November.
Can you look into this please?
D
| Swift - OCTOBER 2000 Vols |
BH, I plan to be on vacation July 5-6 (finally) and on the customer trip on the 7th.
While I am out, Gary Hanks will be keeping our position during trading.
Stacey will be in charge of everything else.
I am comfortable that everything will be covered.
I will be back in town Thursday night.
The primary flight for the customer trip leaves around 11:30.
Others leave at 3:30 and 5:30(?).
The latest idea we had is that Pat would take a later flight on this trip and I will take a later flight on the August trip, allowing one of us to be in the office for half the day.
I can also come in for the half day on the 7th if we decide that is needed.
D
| Vacation |
NutcrackerMarket A Holiday Shopping Wonderland Please join us for the 21st annual Nutcracker Market, "A World of Holiday Shopping" by attending the Foley's Fashion Show and Holiday Brunch.
When: Friday, November 9, 2001 Where: Reliant Hall (formally the Astrohall) Time: 9:00 a.m. priority shopping 10:15 a.m. seating 10:30 a.m. fashion show 11:15 a.m. brunch Noon-6:00 p.m. shopping Nutcracker hostesses: Patty Lee, Beth Apke, Susan Musch, Donette Dewar What a perfect way to start your holiday shopping, spend some time with the bosses and mingle with your co-workers.
There are 36 tickets available; they will be distributed on a first-come first-served basis.
Please r.s.v.p.
to Shelly Jones (shelly.jones@enron.com).
Thanks
| "Activities with the Bosses" Nutcracker Market Invitation |
This message applies to all that use the ad hoc database and would like queries and reports to be easier to locate and use.
We have added two enhancements to the Report Master in Ad Hoc this month.
1.
Sorting - The multicolumn reports can now sort by up to two attributes.
For example, you can now group your companies in a business unit by reviewer then preparer.
2.
Common Queries and Reports - Report Master now includes a new tab that includes common queries and reports that are run during the close process.
This tool allows you to pull up a list of queries and reports that are relevant to the accrual or return process, and fill in the relevant criteria on the form.
The list of queries and reports includes a description.
New look - The new report master will now automatically be opened each time the ad hoc database is launched.
To get these fantastic enhancements to your ad hoc database, just use the Ad Hoc Import Wizard to import The Whole Enchilada (TWE) by following the steps below: ?-------(Wizard) (Enchiladas) -------?
| New Features in the Ad Hoc Database! |
I am currently responsible for the following companies: 20R 20Q 890 1572 In preparing our monthly tax accrual closing entries, I have noticed that the MTM activity on each of the above referenced companies does not roll between the Income Statement and the Balance Sheet.
There are PRM assets on each of the companies (except 20R) and there is unrealized revenue on each of the companies (except 1572).
However, the change in activity on the balance sheet does not equal the income that is recognized in the 4200-0000 account.
I have attached a spreadsheet detailing the B/S accounts that I am looking at, as well as the amounts booked in account 4200-0000 on each company.
There is a difference of 15,886,556 that I cannot explain.
For tax purposes, I am currently reversing the amounts related to the balance sheet accounts, but I need to know where the offset is for the 15,886,556 appearing on the income statement.
Please let me know if you have any information concerning this issue.
Thank you.
| MTM Income |
Michelle: As we discussed, would you please record the following tax entry in TIS: Dr. Cr.
Other income $710,594,336 Interest expense $36,001,000 Non-current deferred debit $674,593,336 The above entry is temporary and will reverse non-current deferred tax liability.
The principal intent of this entry is to reverse deferred tax on the book losses attributable to the unwinding of Project Raptor.
Thank you, John.
| Raptor Unwind Losses |
Chris, I am not sure if you are the person to answer these questions or not, but I have your name as my contact.
I have a few questions regarding Company 20Q: 1.
Bad Debts Expense/Allowance for Doubtful Accounts: The balance sheet activity does not match the income statement activity.
The difference is roughly $10 million.
Could you please provide a detailed analysis of the following two accounts: 52501000 20017000 2.
Amortization: What does the expense in account 5700-0000 relate to?
I see that the monthly expense increased from 2,959 to 39,462 in April.
Did some new items appear?
If so, please explain the nature of the transactions.
I will need to this information to ensure that our tax amortization is properly reflected for 2001.
3.
Deferred Debits: Please provide an explanation of what is in this account.
4.
State Apportionment: Please verify that the following amounts are truly foreign in nature (as evidenced by jurisdiction code 79).
I am asking for verification so that I can be sure that my calculated state tax rate is correct.
| Questions Related to 20Q |
They're here .
.
.
.
.
the Nutcracker Market tickets are in!!!!!
Please come by EB1756 anytime to pick yours up.
On the back of each ticket is a table number.
The attached roster will let you know the hostess and other tax guests you will be sitting with.
With regards to transportation, you might want to see if anyone is interested in carpooling or you can drive yourself.
I understand things get really busy - so plan to be there early.
9:00 Priority Shopping for Brunch guests only (that's you) 10:15 Seating ( please be prompt) 10:30 Fashion Show 11:15 Brunch Following brunch, shop 'til you drop and ENJOY the day!
Shelly
| Nutcracker Market Tickets |
Mary, I have eight companies that are ranked as 3's.
Below are the dates I have tentatively marked down for CB meetings.
Since you are the only required attendee, I have not reserved meeting rooms at this point.
I think all the 17th floor rooms are pretty well booked anyway.
I was thinking we could meet in your cube to discuss these companies on the given dates.
Company # Date 551 11/14 1572 11/19 (this is the same day as company 20R.
we might be able to do them at the same time) 47E 11/20 890 11/26 986 11/29 1095 12/5 003 12/13 (these are both divisions of 367) 1700 12/13 In addition to these companies, I have the following tentative dates planned for my 4's: Company # Date 1573 11/26 (the same day as 890. both are divisions of 985) 1407 11/28 1650 12/18 (these are all the same type of company, and do not have much activity at all) 1688 12/18 1690 12/18 1691 12/18 1699 12/18 Let me know your thoughts/availability for these dates.
I figure we can plan a time around when you are free on each specific day.
| Cumulative Build for 3's and 4's |
When I put the changes in TIS, the total RTA changes from (8,562,517) to (13,717,606).
The change of (5.1) million is not what Robbie passed along to me as the expected change.
Do those numbers sound correct?
Thanks,
| Co. 87C RTA |
Hi, Just wanted to let everyone know that I will be out tomorrow.
If you need anything room reservations, deliveries, copies, etc.
please do not hesitate to ask Aurora.
She is here to help out and please feel comfortable asking her for assistance.
She has school in the mornings so she'll be in at 12PM.
See you Wednesday.
If you need to get a hold of me I can be reached at (713)302-8236 (cell) or you can leave me a message on my work voicemail.
I will be checking it.
Thanks,
| Out |
When: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 5:00 PM-6:00 PM (GMT-06:00) Central Time (US & Canada).
Where: EB 1724 *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* The purpose of the meeting is to review the method of accrual of tax on the Raptor entities.
Thanks, John.
| Tax Accruals on the Raptor Companies |
Cathy, I want to recap our conversation yesterday because, after I thought about it, I still do not understand the issue with 20Q and its PRM: A credit reserve was set up for bad debts for $5,577,900 and credited to account 25100300 Prudency Reserve.
It is my understanding that this was the only way to book this transaction.
But I do not understand why this was booked in a PRM account and not booked to the Allowance for Bad Debts account.
Also, when I reduce the 25100300 account balance by the $5,577,900 that was booked there, my difference doubles to $11,155,800 (see attached spreadsheet).
So was account 25100300 originally credited or debited by the $5,577,900?
If it was originally debited and I remove that debit, then the PRM will roll.
Also, will there be anyway to move this transaction out of the PRM accounts in order to effectively roll these accounts every month?
Thanks for your help.
| 20Q's PRM |
Tom, Here is a sample of the output for this request.
For this I have only used May 2002.
I for the boxplots one has had records removed when the ambient and gearbox temp is less than 0 (I can provide turbines and times if needed).
There were many records where this occured.
There were also 5 records where the Gearbox temp was over 100 and these were also removed.
All of these over 100 records occured on turbine 105 on May 1st between 1640 and 1740 (UTC).
Temperatures were as high as 366.
If this format is acceptable let me know and I will generate graphs for the data we have (Jan - "current" 2002).
Mark
| Gear Box Temp Graphs |
Tom, The graphs attached are formatted the same as the sample set I sent you earlier.
As of today, Desert Sky 10-minute data has not been uploaded for June 2002 yet, and the data for Jan is nonexistant, so the graphs go from Feb to May 2002.
If you have questions or comments let me know.
Mark
| Gearbox Temp graphs |
Andre, Here is a short subset of 10-minute records containing the extreme temperature event (approximately 3 hours of before/after data).
The turbine was #105 at Desert Sky on May 1st.
Times are in UTC.
The values are 10-minute averages.
If you have additional questions let me know.
Mark
| Subset of data with extreme temp |
Joe, Attached is the Curtail200206.db file.
I have a question about a sequence of events.
For turbine 840006029 on June 19th the turbine is "Energy curtailed" (Index = 10843), THEN it has the message "Turbine Com Established" (Index = 10855).
Then there are no other messages (for that turbine) until a "Energy curtailed" message (Index = 11134).
Is there anything I can assume about the time between the curtailment messages?
For example, was the turbine uncurtailed when the com established message was recorded?
Or are did the turbine become uncurtailed and no message was recorded?
Thanks,
| Curtail200206.db Question |
Tom, Here is the report I prepared on the methods and types of grpahs for this work request.
As examples I used the May 2002 graphs, including the Paretos for the Pitch and overspeed faults.
If you need additional clarification, or have questions let me know.
Mark
| WR613 Pitch System performance |
Jeff, The files are in DesertSkyCurtail in your transfer dirtectory.
Check the sums of the KWH.LOST columns with the values you were provided.
These all seem to have been created the same day.
Mark
| May curtailment spread |
Tom, From the stage I was at on the duration and energy it was just as easy to do all 7 sites as the 3 you specifically requested.
If you do not want the additional graphs let me know and I'll pull them out of the Acrobat file.
Mark
| WR613 Pitch System Fault Pareto |
Tom, I have energy estimates for May 2002 attached.
Graph 1 is site totals, graph 2 is (total lost)/(total actual production) where total actual production is taken from the kWh reported in the owner report, and graph 3 is the by turbine distribution (using box plots) of energy lost.
The energy lost estimation method I employed is susceptible to problems with data recovery (10-minute data), which in May 2002 was especially poor at Klondike and Fenner, so those number are not as informative as those for the other sites.
If these graphs provide you the information you need, I will continue with the remaining months (Jan - Apr).
Otherwise let me know and we'll refine this process to get you what you need.
Mark
| WR613 Pitch System Performance (Energy) |
Boys, Can I get a copy of an ERCOT bill that has come through.
If one has come through for an EES account, that would be great.
If it is some other account, that will be fine.
If there are disclosure issues, just black out the name of the counterparty on the bill if that is possible.
I need to start looking at this stuff to see if we are pricing stuff right down here.
Thanks.
| ERCOT Bills |
Gentlemen: As a result of changes at ERCOT we will have to revise the Position manager and QSE MOS to incorporate the new ercot zones.
If the ESCA team can come up with an implementation plan that would be great.
Also, we have not heard a thing about testing for daylight savings time.
Are we ready for the switch?
The ERCOT Board approved the congestion zones for next year, 2001.
The ERCOT Board accepted the 3 CSC 4 CM Zone model for use in commercial congestion management for 2002.
Effective date is January 1, 2002.
The three CSC's are Graham-Parker 345 kV DCKT, Sandow-Temple 345 kV DCKT and STP-DOW 345 kV DCKT.
The four CM Zones are West02, North02, South02 and Houston02.
A power point presentation along with a map is available at ftp://ftp.ercot.com/CSCDATA/csc.htm.
| New Zones |
Dear jforney@enron.com, We're writing to confirm your purchase of the following Amazon Marketplace item from finance485@email.msn.com: "Trading for a Living: Psychology, Trading Tactics, Money Management [Hardcover" Amazon.com Payments has charged your credit card (Visa) for this purchase, and the funds have been credited to your Amazon Marketplace seller.
On behalf of the seller, finance485@email.msn.com, we thank you for your purchase.
The seller has agreed to ship by 11-14-2001.
This message serves as advance notification of your shipment--most sellers will NOT send a
| Your Amazon Marketplace Purchase |
John, ERCOT has OOME us for 11-14 for all 24 hours.
I spoke with Jackie and Hubert Davis at ERCOT about this and they will make it an OOME.
Yesterday it seemed we affected prices because prices spiked to $26.71 HE 1000 and stated to come off as Frontera came on.
Alex M.
| OOME |
John, The attached file is a chronology of the OOMC services Enron has provided since the opening of the market.
I thought you might find this useful for submitting disputes over OOMC payments.
<<Enron OOMC Chronology.xls>> Bill Kettlewell Client Service Representative Electric Reliability Council of Texas E-mail: BKettlewell@ercot.com Telephone: (512)248-3172 Pager: (800)771-5302 - Enron OOMC Chronology.xls
| OOMC Chronology |
JMF, I have a discrepancy with LCRA on 10/22/01.
The following notes are in the P&L... "830711,830709 .
The original deal was a buy from LCRA and a sale to RESI but LCRA did not enter into Portal in time.
Therefore the purchase was made from the ERCOT Imbal.
market where it was purchased for $11.55."
The initials in the P&L are 'GTP' We show this in the system as an ERCOT-Imbalance purchase and a sale to Reliant however LCRA claims that we should show this purchase from them.
Please pass this along to the appropriate trader to clear up the discrepancy.
Thanks,
| LCRA discrepancy |
John, I made an adjustment in Enpower for Friday.
When balancing the books, I noticed that we were 100mw's long into the pool for HE21 & HE22, but in the portal it only shows 50mw for each hour.
(A 16hour block of 50mw was already in the portal.)
So I adjusted HE21 & HE22 from 50mw to 0 mw, so that it matched the portal.
Please notify me if my adjustment was incorrect.
I made a note in the comment field for enpower #871228.
Joe
| Ercot Balancing for Friday |
We need to talk about instantaneous supply and how it is dealt with under your Sand Hills contract.
The contract I am working on with Austin really doesn't address this issue and in order for me to include this in the contract we will need to talk.
I have a call in also with Lonestar to talk about this as well.
I have Janet Wallis helping me address some of these issues.
We may want to schedule a meeting to include her also.
Let me know where we stand.
| Austin Energy - Sand Hills |
Ettera issues: 1.
When hourly is asked to manage a day ahead position we cannot adjust the position in ettera and makes it a worthless tool, the position cannot be found.
We have to adjust the day ahead position in the portal directly.
2.
If we have a day ahead position and adjust it hourly it will change back to the original schedule when we submit another schedule.
3.
Frontera is too time consuming and confusing when we have to show a buy from frontera and a sell to frontera when we buy from them.
4.
The whole process takes to long, on average it usually takes 5 minutes to put an hourly schedule in when it only takes a minute when done directly in the portal.
Thats all I got, I hope it helps.
Alex
| Ettera |
John, I wanted to clarify my e-mail I sent from work I don't think I was specific enough.
1.
On the day ahead position that hourly would manage, lets say it is in the short term ercot book.
In ettera if you go to that book you will not find that trade.
So the only way to adjust it is to go and do it in the portal.
2.
Also if you have a day ahead position and we manage it hourly,if we were to adjust it for balday, for instance if we were long 50mw in the pool and we sold 25mw balday it would reflect the change.
But if we came back and did another trade and submitted to xml it would change back to 50mw.
3.
We need to change how we show a buy from frontera.
We now have to buy from frontera and then sale back to them.
This was a way to fix the problem short term but it should not be a long term solution.
4.
And ettera is still very time consuming.
It takes anywhere from 5-8 min.
to enter a trade for just one hour.
I hope this is more specific.
| eterra |
John/John/Frank As we are approaching the November 1st Trading Track interview dates, we need to finalize the reminder of the external candidate's initial screen.
Can you please provide me with your feedback/status.
If we need to re-assign your candidates to other traders please let me know by return.
Thanks,
| Trading Track Interviews |
The ERCOT Board approved the congestion zones for next year, 2001.
The ERCO= T Board accepted the 3 CSC 4 CM Zone model for use in commercial congestion= management for 2002.
Effective date is January 1, 2002.
The three CSC's = are Graham-Parker 345 kV DCKT, Sandow-Temple 345 kV DCKT and STP-DOW 345 kV= DCKT.
The four CM Zones are West02, North02, South02 and Houston02.
A po= wer point presentation along with a map is available at ftp://ftp.ercot.com= /CSCDATA/csc.htm.
=20 Current Congestion Cost and Outlook.
The congestion charges that have been= incurred are 55.6 million or 137 million depending on the methodology used= to calculate the charge.
If you look purely at the scheduled MWs then it i= s 137 MM based upon the ERCOT protocols.
The actual cost to redispatch and = clear congestion as of Sept. 22, 2001 was 55.6 MM.
Both obviously are very = high considering it is for one month of operation.=20 When the 20 MM trigger was hit August 14, 2001, ERCOT has 6 month by Protoc= ol and reaffirmed in the commission order to implement the full zonal model= .
This means that there will no longer be an uplift of interzonal congestio= n, rather a direct assignment of the charge.
The charge may be partially of= fset by the TCR that will be auctioned.
The PUCT has indicated an interest = to move to direct assignment prior to the development and implementation of= a TCR instrument as a hedge.
I am chairing the congestion management work= ing group that is deciding the TCR issue and will be dealing with the local= congestion issues when that trigger has been hit.
I will attach a copy of= the current draft of the TCR white paper.
In short, the TCR is a financia= l option that can be purchased as hedge against zonal congestion.
There is= no physical requirement for the TCR in that you do not have to physically = schedule to receive the benefit of the TCR.
There will be an auction on or= about the 4th of February, 2002 and the full zonal implementation will tak= e place February 15, 2002.
The tentative schedule is as follows: ?=0910/5/01 - Distribute draft TCR White Paper ?=0910/22/01 - Review and edit draft TCR White Paper ?=0910/30/01 - Distribute TCR White Paper to WMS ?=0911/1/01 - WMS Meeting; vote on PRR ?=0911/8/01 - TAC Meeting ?=0911/19/01 - Board Meeting ?=0912/4/01 - ERCOT issues notice of TCR Auction ?=092/15/02 - First effective date of TCRs and direct assignment of CSC Con= gestion Costs =20 Capacity Auction.
The capacity auction workshops have begun to rework that= capacity rule and problems experienced with the last round.
There was an = initial discussion on the problems that were experienced with credit and ho= w the standard was one-way and the buyers of capacity were left without rec= ourse.
There was a subsequent conference call with the credit professional= s to discuss the issues ( I did not participate) and there will be an addit= ional meeting on the 19th.
The purpose of the short-term meeting are to re= ctify issues such as credit and documents prior to the March and July 2002 = auctions.
Substantive issues such as the actual products, zone determinati= on and the auction process will be part of a rulemaking prior to the Septem= ber 2002 auction which includes annual products.=20 Protocol Implementation.
ERCOT is in the process of determining what shoul= d be included in the Phase II design which will begin January 2001.
There = is a priority list that is currently under review by ERCOT vendors to deter= mine lead times of Phase II items in an attempt to deliver Phase II items A= SAP.
Parviz Adib from MOD stressed that there are certain issues that the = PUCT expects to be addressed in Phase II.
Issues that do not require major= system changes might still be doable in Phase II if the PRR Process is sta= rted immediately.
There is a placeholder in the Protocols related to BULs = and loads acting as resources.
Mechanism for Simultaneous Procurement of Ancillary Services.
The PUCT ha= s expressed concern that there could be price reversals associated with the= ancillary services market (if it is assumed that the various ancillary ser= vices have different levels of value to the market).
The Board had approve= d a contingency plan to allow price modifications in the early markets, how= ever the plan has not been implemented.
The WMS discussed, at length, the = issue of simultaneously clearing all three markets - non-spinning, regulati= on, and responsive reserve.
A task force was formed to initially identify = the principles for developing a mechanism for simultaneous procurement of a= ncillary services issue.
It was suggested that a consultant be hired to de= velop Protocol language once the principles are identified.
The first task= force meeting was cancelled and has not been rescheduled.
=20 Demand-Side Task Force.
Jay Zarnikau reported on activities of the Demand-= Side Task Force that is addressing Balancing Up Load (BUL) Market Issues an= d other demand-side issues.
The PUCT expects the full functionality to be = in place on January 1, 2002.
The DSTF met last on October 1st (third meeti= ng).
The DSTF completed a draft status report on Demand-Side Resources and= Demand Responsiveness.
It was noted that the work of the DSTF is not comp= lete and has not been approved by any ERCOT Committee or the Board.
Howeve= r, ERCOT was required to file a report on these issues in the STF Report.
= The report reviews the policy considerations that have prompted interest in= the demand side of ERCOT's market, reviews the PUCT's directive, reviews t= he role of demand-side resources in ERCOT's markets, and identifies the iss= ues and impediments that the DSTF is presently addressing.
It also summari= zes the options discussed by the DSTF to date.
The PUCT staff has suggeste= d that ERCOT hire a consultant, such as Eric Hirsch, to provide more resour= ces for this effort.
The group expects to wrap up BUL issues and address d= irect load control issues at its next meeting.
Unit Specific Deployments.
At the next WMS meeting October 24, 2001, there= will be a discussion regarding unit specific deployments and ERCOT will di= scuss the issues and the difficult that participants are having to meet the= ramp rates of the deployments.
The WMS will develop a list of issues and = case studies for ERCOT to discuss.
The WMS also briefly discussed PRR 282 = related to defining OOME as an Instructed Deviation.
| ERCOT Update |
John, I have a report showing that you are still logging into the Telerate application.
As you know, Telerate is going away soon and will no longer be available.
I also show that you have been migrated to the new Kobra application.
Do you need any help recreating your Telerate pages in Kobra, or help linking your Excel models into Kobra?
If you need additional assistance, please give me a call.
Thanks,
| Do you need help w/Kobra |
John.......Could you please forward this on to who did this trade.
The deal # is 815969 a purchase of 25 mw from Calpine @ $16 and a sell to CPS deal 815970 for 25 mw @ $17.
This was for HE 24 on 10/11.
It looks like it may be in enpower twice.
Could you please advise.
Thanks.
| Calpine / CPS on 10/11 |
All - Please wrap up the phone interviews ASAP.
If you are having trouble getting a hold of anyone, please let me know so that I may try to reach them.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Thank you,
| Reminder - Phone Interviews |
Terrel and I had a conference call with BOC this morning.
The call was very positive as they were still interested in talking with us.
They had a number of questions regarding the contract terms and seems like they want to sign something by week end.
I need clarification on a few issues that they raised.
We need to give them answers tommorow.
Proposed Contract terms: 1.
Houston Zone: 1.95 MW +/- 15% per settlement Interval 2.
South Zone: 2.75 MW +/- 10% per settlement Interval 3.
North Zone: 15 MW +/- 10% per settlement Interval 4.
West Zone: 1.75 MW +/- 10% per settlement Interval ** BOC going to Balancing Energy (+4% charges) outside the band ** 1.
Interruptibility - BOC wanted to understand the mechanics.
Specifically, they wanted to know how Enron would work with them to maximize curtailment opportunities.
They also wanted to know the quantity they could curtail (e.g.
If deal is 15 MW +/- 10%, can BOC curtail 16.5 MW, or just 15 MW).
Also, do they pay any penalty when they curtail (4%, etc.)
2.
Scheduled maintenance - Can they sell contract power a week forward.
Is there any penalty for not being within the band during those hours.
3.
BOC wants a fixed price quote for all Ancillaries and ERCOT Passthroughs.
However they want the ability to unwind this fixed price position should they feel they are better off with ERCOT market prices once the market becomes more transparent.
What is Enron's ability to provide such a service?
4.
BOC doesnt like the 4% charge in excess of Balancing Energy everytime they are outside the Quantity Band.
They said that they dont want to pay more when prices are high and they are outside the band.
They want a fixed fee instead of 4% of BES price.
Given the bands we have placed in the contract, BOC was outside the band a.
15% of the time in their Houston Zone Interval Load b.
10% of the time in their South Zone Interval Load c. less than 1% of the time in their North Zone Interval Load d. 3% of the time in their South Zone Interval Load Regards
| BOC Gases Contract |
Enron Federal Credit Union Stands Ready to Assist You Enron Federal Credit Union would like you to know that we stand ready to assist our members affected by the recent events.
We are committed to those who may need special assistance during this difficult time.
The State of Enron Federal Credit Union We are dedicated to providing our members with all the services they would normally expect to receive.
Business will continue to be conducted as it always has.
We will continue to provide loans.
In the event you have an EFCU loan or credit card, we will negotiate a workable agreement for its repayment if necessary.
These arrangements will be made on an individual basis.
ATM withdrawals and Debit Card transactions will carry the same daily limits.
EFCU will be conducting "business as usual."
EFCU is a not-for-profit financial institution (a cooperative) owned and operated by you, the member.
And, although we are here exclusively to provide financial services to the employees of Enron Corp. and their family members, we remain financially independent from Enron Corp. And, your accounts at the Credit Union are insured to $100,000.00 by the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF), supervised by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), an agency of the U.S. Government.
How To Access The Credit Union You may continue to access your funds in the Credit Union at EB 399, through our electronic services, or at any of our Texas Credit Union Service Center branches:
| Enron Federal Credit Union Stands Ready to Assist You |
If you guys have been keeping up, you know Enron Europe is waving the white flag and shutting down.
Our email addresses (and our jobs!)
are being deactivated as of midday tomorrow, so you can reach us at:
| C'est la vie! |
Attached are the results of the Balancing Test evaluation performed on October 25, 2001.
According to may paperwork, I should send the results back to Steve Olin but I cannot contact him therefore, I am contacting you with the results.
I regret to inform you that Enron has unsuccessfully completed Balancing Test evaluation.
Results are attached.
<<ENRON_ bal_10_25_01_evaluation_v2_fail.xls>> - ENRON_ bal_10_25_01_evaluation_v2_fail.xls
| Enron Balancint Test Documentation |
Attention: The database will be undergoing maintenance for next five minutes.
Please logout from the MOS and settlement application.
You will be notified when the system is online.
| MOS |
This is a notice to inform you that the server where your Outlook mailbox resides is scheduled for an outage tonight.
Your mailbox will be temporarily unavailable starting anytime after 11pm and may continue to be unavailable until 1 a.m., when all server maintenance work have been completed.
Outlook Web Access (OWA) will also be unavailable during this time.
Blackberry users: Message delivery may be delayed for a few minutes.
If you have any questions, please call the Resolution Center at x31411.
| CORRECTION: Outlook Outage - Friday, December 28, 2001 |
I note in TW's bullets for 12-22 that TW did the "Cal Border Backhaul" deal with SW Gas.
The last I heard about it, the deal had cratered.
I had serious reservations about doing the deal as it was initially described to me, which included a Cal border sale of "surplus" gas and a backhaul for EES on behalf of SW Gas.
My probems were (1) the issue of possible or apparent affiliate preference and (2) the need for adequate documentation of "surplus line pack."
My last guidance was that a deal like this might be doable, but only if we could document the "surplus" and if Stan signed off on it.
What happened?
Does the deal involve EES???
Was that raised with Stan and Danny?
The bullets don't mention the identity of the "shipper" that the backhaul was done for.
Please respond.
DF
| TW Backhaul |
Per Louie Soldano, I called Dave Sinclair (GPG ROW) about whether we have any ability to negotiate a favorable right of way deal with the BNSF railroad.
In Dave's experience, that is a nonstarter.
Apparently, a bunch of utilities, including us through Dave, have even formed a coalition to try to figure out how to get the railroads to be more cooperative.
If the RR owns its ROW outright (which many of the old railroads do out west) we might be able to condemn an easement by getting a FERC certificate.
In other words, the RR would be treated just like any other landowner.
If we did that, Dave thinks BNSF would treat it as a declaration of war.
Since our lines cross or parallel BNSF right of way all over the place from Topock to Duluth, that would be foolish.
I swore Sinclair to secrecy and told him what part of the world I was interested in and he thought we could probably stitch together private ROW without too much pain.
If the RR option doesn't pan out, we may want to suggest to Tino and Dennis that our ROW people can handle this.
Assuming we can't come up with some magic contact with the RR, I propose that, at the appropriate time, we tell Dennis and Tino that the last 7 or 8 miles of ROW should be flagged as a potential problem that Enron can help resolve once we decide to go forward.
Other than the BNSF issue, I don't think we have any specific "to dos" or any specific comeback date to Dennis and Tino.
So what do you guys think should happen next?
DF
| BNSF |
I believe you got a copy of the John Sommer letter to producers dated Jan 6 that MKM's spies intercepted.
She forwarded the Sommer letter to Stan and discussed it with him.
Dari and I vented our aggravation by drafting the attached letter to Gibson and Kyle complaining of Sommer's duplicity, but after tempers cooled, MKM and I decided not to send it to Stan or urge him to send a written response.
As it stands, MKM and I will probably bring it up with Sommer in OK City and strongly suggest the importance of coordinated communication to the producers.
Stan may also bring the letter up orally next time he's on the phonne with Gibson or Kyle as an example of how not to handle this situation.
| letter |
That was an interesting little conversation.
I came back down and looked for you guys but you had both split.
We should take a few minutes and plug John in on what happened at the end of that meeting when the power issues came up.
I'm somewhat surprised at Bill's reaction, but what the hell, now we can run with Cunningham, and we know MKM's pulse on Hubbard (and Bill's).
Pretty damn good end to the week, all things considered.
DF
| ? |
I've got a meeting set up with Knippa at 10:00 on Thursday .
Susan, please join me as Nemec will be there and he and you had most of the back and forth on the confidentiality issue.
Either Steve or Kevin need to give me some sense of our authority .
Any thoughts on that??
Is the number still $200,000?
What would we be willing to settle for?
Is a renegotiation of the existing deal in the works anyway as part of the expansion scenarios?
I'll have martha set up a meeting Thur.
am to discuss before we talk to Knippa.
DF
| ECS |
In the last several weeks several areas have come up where the TW commercial team could, in my opinion, use some clear written guidance on gray areas under the tariff ought to be interpreted.
Here is my list.
Please add items if I've missed any.
1.
When can TW "selectively market" available capacity?
I.e., if capacity is on the board as available, and no one has bought it, are there any limits on calling up a customer, or a group of customers, and pitching a deal?
I think we have a lot of discretion here--after all, using the telephone to
| TW |
I've deferred the negotiation with Mark Knippa given my need for some information from James and Kevin on our ability to avoid peak usage, etc.
Steve Harris and I talked this morning about settlement authority and our going in position, obviously, is that ECS should pick up the whole $300+ K. I expect that Knippa will angle toward a split the difference approach and then try to put his share of the value on some future deal.
To counter that, I think I'll need to hit him pretty firmly on the "relationship issue."
I.e., he's got to fix this problem or his chance of doing more deals with the pipeline group will be seriously hurt.
That should be a big deal to him and may get us the resolution we need.
To push that I need three things from you: 1.
Rod, have we already communicated to ECS, or at a higher level like Redmond, that we won't do any more deals with them?
Obviously if we have already told them we're done working with them, my threat won't carry much weight.
2.
Are you all OK with the threat?
I suspect that our threat to quit doing business with them will go immediately up their chain of command and that Redmond or someone will call Stan to complain.
3.
Can we agree conceptually to do future deals if Knippa needs a bucket to put our dollars in?
He may propose something specific and I'd like to be able to agree that we will "work with them" on future deals.
Thanks.
DF
| ECS |
Who is the exact corporate parent of Mavrix?
I think I saw an email that said ETS, but I don't think ETS is a corporate entity.
Is it Enron Pipeline Company?
Please let Bob and me know.
Thanks.
df
| mavrix |
now that I look at this, I'm not sure I'm included as I was just a bcc on the email.
Please check out the website and see if you can learn anything.
pls print out the relevant parts of the website includeing a list of which computers we can choose from.
thanks df
| ClickAtHome Pilot 3 - An Invitation |
Three to-dos on our Mavrix meeting: 1.
Follow up and make sure the officers get set up correctly.
2.
Talk to Perry Frazier in planning--he is keeping copies of the actual EBB
| Mavrix |
Has the old adversary adopted an "if you can't beat em, join em" strategy?
I noticed that CNG is planning to build some high deliverability storage.
More competition is always a problem, but at least that is a vindication of the MHP strategy.
I noticed Vaina was quoted in the trade press.
Is he the man on Tioga now?
DF
| CNG |
There were several questions left for legal/regulatory to work on at the close of our meeting today.
I'll try to restate them, and add my initial thoughts, so we can all be sure to focus on the correct problems.
Q 1.
Can TW use "negotiated rate" agreements for its new 150 mm/d expansion?
A.
Yes.
Independence, Guardian, and other new pipeline projects were certificated on the basis of negotiated rate contracts.
The only restriction is that we need to always offer cost-based recourse rate service as an alternative to negotiated rates.
We hope to use negotiated rate agreements for the entire 150 mm of capacity, but we won't know until the contracts are executed how much of it will be negotiated rate contracts and how much of it will be under recourse rate contracts.
I guess that means that in the cert.
app., we just tell the commission that we will be 100% at risk and that given the huge interest in the open season, we have no doubts about our ability to sell the full 150.
We should also tell the Commission we expect to sell the capacity using negotiated rate contracts or recourse rate contracts or a combination of both.
Q 2.
Can we give prospective customers a "cafeteria style" menu of options (to steal Jeff's term), like the following: 1.
5 yr. neg.
rate deal at a locked in $.60 plus fuel and surcharges (or whatever number we decide on) 2.
10 y. neg.
rate deal at a locked in $.45 plus fuel and surcharges 3.
15 yr. neg rate deal at a locked in $.35 blah blah 4 .
15 yr cost based recourse rate plus fuel and surcharges (importantly this option is not locked in and will float with TW's actual rate levels and fuel retainage percentages) A. I think the answer here is "yes."
Whatever options we come up with for 1, 2, and 3, we will always have to offer 4 as well.
Susan and Steve Stojic: please confirm that we have the right to define specific negotiated rate options and stick to them.
Otherwise, this negotiated rate approach could get completely unstructured such that we end up with some guys taking our specific options and other guys custom tailoring weird variations (like a 7 yr, 231 day contract at $.51764, for example).
I'm not sure that would be a bad thing, but we need to think about it.
We need to be sure we can tell a customer "no" and make it stick if he tries to mix and match by asking for the 5 yr term and the $.35 rate, for example.
I think we can lay out options of our choosing and then enforce a "no substitutions" policy (this is sticking with the "cafeteria" theme) but we need to be sure.
Q.3.
If we can use the "cafeteria options" approach, how much flexibility do we have in structuring the options?
A: This one is hard.
We need to be sure that the price and term we choose to offer for options 1-3 is solely within our discretion.
We don't want to be second guessed by FERC as to whether we should have offered option 1 at $.58 instead of $.60.
Susan and Steve: if you guys confirm that we have discretion in how to structure our negotiated rate options, does that mean we can slant the economics of the negotiated rate options so they are a better deal than the recourse option (for most shippers)?
I.e., could we deliberately incent shippers to sign on for the short term deals--i.e., by
| TW Expansion |
Carter Phillips is going to have his partner, that noted litigator, the one and only Phil Nowak, argue the case!
When you gonna be up here on Monday???
Let me know--I'll be at the office on Mon.
PM.
df
| MHP -- Bath Cert Petition |
Either I didn't fully understand the December Texas Eastern order or else FERC has just put a new and unhelpful spin on it.
The Thursday rehearing order dramatically changes how the "shipper must have title" rule applies to acquisitions of upstream capacity.
I thought the Dec. order pretty clearly allowed a pipe to acquire upstream capacity and then resell that capacity under the acquiring pipeline's rate schedules.
FERC specifically held that the "shipper must have title" policy won't be applied if the acquiring pipe treats the acquired capacity "as though it were part of its own system".
(p. 61,886) The Dec. order even cited TW's acquisition of park n ride capacity from PG&E as an example of the type of transaction that (I thought) could be done without advance Commission approval.
Now, FERC explains that it did not intend a "blanket waiver" of the shipper must have title policy.
Pipes can still acquire upstream capacity without advance FERC permission, but only if the acquiring pipe is going to use the acquired capacity for operational needs or to resell under the selling pipe's release mechanism.
If the acquiring pipe wants to use the acquired capacity to support sales of service under the acquiring pipe's rate schedules, a specific waiver of the "must have title" policy is required (see FN 20 and text).
We are right back to where we started.
I guess the orders signal that FERC is much more likely to grant waivers of the "must have title" policy than in the past, but I don't think we are good to go to acquire upstream storage, for example, and resell it as FDD or IDD until we get permission first.
Shelley--let me know if you hear any expressions of outrage from other
| Texas Eastern |
In anticipation of potential litigation involving TW's operational activities, please prepare an analysis for me of the reasons for TW's sale of excess natural gas at the California border.
I am aware of several of these sales and have been informed that excess pressure at the border is the basic reason for them.
I'd like a more specific explanation that includes the following information: 1.
What are the specific pressures and volume considerations that could make it operationally necessary to sell gas at the California border?
2.
What is the process that is followed to make such a determination?
3.
Which individuals or groups are involved in determining whether an operational sale is necessary?
4.
In what way have system operations changed since last year and how do those changes contribute to the increased frequency of such sales compared to previous years?
5.
What alternatives to operational sales are considered before the decision to make a sale is reached?
Thanks for your attention to this request.
Please give me a call to discuss and please designate your response as "Privileged and Confidential, Attorney Client Privileged."
| TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE |
I got the call today.
Got the job.
I feel like the dog that caught the car--enjoyed the chase but don't know quite what to do with the car.
DF
| Houston |
I don't see any problem with this transaction since it appears to be limited to Louisiana assets, but the issue of whether we are impacted by the noncompete agreement strikes me as a commercial call.
Please let me know if you have any problem with the transaction and I will pursue it.
Thanks.
DF
| LRC Joint Venture |
A couple of additional thoughts on this morning's conversation: 1. if we really think the next 6 or 8 months will sort out the takeaway and receipt point capacity issues, why not bet the whole farm and try to hold onto the whole 150 mm/d until next winter or fall and see if the perceived value goes up?
We could tell Calpine "no" on their bid and hold them off for several months "negotiating" if that's what we thought would lead to the best value.
I don't personally think this would be a prudent approach, but its where our logic leads in the extreme, so we'd better be prepared to explain why getting the bird in the hand from Calpine is smart.
2.
We'll research the question of whether we can reject any recourse bids that come in over the next 6-8 months if we decide to hold onto the 60 mm/d for awhile.
I've thought about it a bit more and I'm pretty sure you're not going to like the answer.
First, FERC says we've got to have a recourse rate in place for all capacity, new or old.
One reason is that there needs to be a max rate that applies to long term capacity releases.
We have the option on new projects to go with the existing max tariff rate or a new incrementally designed rate.
We are going with the existing tariff rate on RedRock.
Fine, but that makes the existing rate the recourse rate for all purposes.
FERC's logic will be that TW could sell all of the RedRock capacity at recourse rates (currently $.38) and never suffer a revenue shortfall even if future rate cases reduce TW's overall rates, because the costs of all TW's facilities--including the new project--will be considered
| RedRock |
Pls route Mary Kay and I on the next draft of the policy.
Rod mentioned this morning that a new version would be coming out soon.
Thanks df
| Trading Policy |
Barbara: in case my voice mails didn't make sense, see the final section of Shelley's paper on valuation.
ETS is working through INGAA to push in a direction that is inconsistent with where Paul and Mark were hoping BLM will go.
DF
| Federal lands issues for Energy Policy Debate |
Lets defer to MKM's group on whether to seek a waiver on this.
I don't see any real value to us of solving Mewbourne's problems for them.
DF
| TW/Mewbourne |
I would have jumped yesterday but couldn't figure out how to get my window open.
Since I'm on the 7th floor and the snowdrift goes up to the 4th, it wouldn't have done much good anyway.
Know of any good part time jobs--I need
| Market |
Hey, great talking to you.
I appreciate your willingness to talk to David about the DOE situation.
He's a great guy and one of the best substantive lawyers I've met.
Short bio--U. of Missouri undergrad, Northwestern law
| David Hill |
Porter and the whole gang called me while you were at lunch MKM.
I'll give you a full report when I get off this conf.
call but short answer is they don't want to meet next wk and want us to provide a bunch more info and then meet.
DF
| DC |
I got your message and understand you can't get all of us and Steve Harris in a meeting before Friday.
Lets do it this way: I'll call Maria and MKM tomorrow am to discuss what we have learned so far and I'll grab Steve separately to update him.
No need for all of us in one meeting.
Thanks for trying.
df
| TW Neg. Rates |
Congratulations Adam, and welcome to ETS to both of you!!
You guys may not have heard this, but Mike Moran is retiring and I'm taking over for him as general counsel of the ETS organization.
Does this all mean that I'm your lawyer again just like in the old Zond days???
Weird.
Good luck and best wishes!
DF
| Enron Wind |
I had a prior obligation at lunch on Mon.
We need to reschedule the Leadership Dev.
mtg.
Fran, could you work with Emily and find a time?
Sorry, I know I've disrupted this twice n ow!
I'm good for lunch on Wed if that would work for everyone.
df
| Monday mtg. |
Can anyone remember if they worked on this last year?
I only remember that I didn't know what it was then and I still don't know what it is.
Thanks.
DF
| 1999 Enron Corp. Compliance Report |
I am advised that some of you have not exhibited the requisite amount of "pep."
For lawyers and paralegals, you need to pick your reviewers online if you haven't already done so.
5 or 6 would be sufficient althought the computer lets you pick up to 10.
For those of you who picked more than 5 or 6 I have reduced that number, based on my thoughts about which of your chosen reviewers have had the most direct contact with you and are most likely to give a thorough review.
Let me know if you think I really blew it.
For secretaries, the online stuff is optional.
If you don't use it, I will solicit input from the people you work with like I have in the past and consolidate it with my own comments on one form.
Thanks.
DF
| PEP |
Here's one for you to chew on for awhile.
As we approach the transition to a new organizational structure in ET&S, let's rethink the role and competencies of the legal department.
I'd like each of you to answer the following questions and circulate your answers to me and each other.
To avoid having anyone's answers unduly influenced by anyone else's, please send your responses at 12 noon on Thursday.
No, this isn't being graded, and doesn't affect the PRC process or any other process.
I just want to get access to as much original thinking as possible.
1.
What is the ET&S law dept.
currently best at?
(give one example).
2.
What is the ET&S law dept.
currently worst at?
(give one example).
3.
Without regard for any past objectives, what should our top 3 objectives be?
(make these very specific--objectives like "We should manage legal and
| New ET&S Law Objectives |
Steve!
I was sorry to hear that you have been out sick and generally having a hard time.
Hope you are feeling better and that it is nothing serious.
The rumor is that the most likely cause of your headaches is you colleagues.
No surprise there!
Adios, DF
| Get well soon! |
Cindy, attached is a memo to Stan on the Conoco case.
He had asked for this analysis to help him prepare for the March 29 mediation.
Please print this up for Stan and let me know if anything goes haywire with the memo.
Thanks.
DF
| Conoco Memo |
The following is a memo from accounting containing some new accounting codes you should be aware of.
I should warn you that your timesheets must be approved by your supervisor; therefore, Code 5604 should not be used.
It has come to our attention recently that many of you have been turning in timesheets that specify large amounts of "Miscellaneous?
Unproductive Time" (Code 5309).
To our department, unproductive time isn't a problem.
What is a problem, however, is not knowing exactly what you are doing during your unproductive time.
Attached below is a sheet specifying a tentative extended job code list based on our observations of employee activities.
The list will allow you to specify with a fair amount of precision what you are doing during your unproductive time.
Please begin using this job code list immediately and let us know about any difficulties you encounter.
Thank you,
| New Billing Codes |
???
What rumor was this press release responding to?
What did you do to= =20 drive the stock price down by $5?
I don't hear nuthin in Omaha so you've= =20 gotta keep me plugged in!
DF
| Enron Press |
I read Wednesday's NGPL order (RP00-18-002) as applying only to NGPL due to their unique restrictions and tariff rules.
I do not read it as forcing the rest of the industry (i.e., us) to use the floor rate as the reserve price for negotiated index rate bids and ordinary recourse rate bids.
I think we can still determine the reserve price on a prearranged deal like the ENA deal based on our good faith valuation of the upside provided by the index mechanism.
I.e., on that type of deal, we can determine that the index mechanism is worth "x cents" to us and require a discounted recourse rate bidder to bid more than the floor plus x cents to win.
Agreed?
Note that NGPL whined that the unique rules they are subject to place them at a competitve disadvantage to the rest of the industry (i.e., us) on this issue.
The commission didn't say anything about that, implying to me that the rest of us are still free to do what NGPL cannot do.
DF
| ENA Deal |
Got a call from Dennis out of the blue this afternoon.
He's pretty gung ho, and also alluded to several other projects he's got on the front burner (gas-fired power deals).
He had met again with some DOE folks in DC about the power contract and feels it is 70-80% locked in.
Have you ever known a project developer who would admit to less than 70-80% odds???
I look forward to talking on Tuesday.
DF
| Pueblo |
Congratulations!
Sounds like the merchant storage business has had a good couple of weeks with you guys clearing your environmental hurdles and the Tioga guys finally starting construction!
I may have acted rashly in joining the evil empire--should have jumped into the storage business instead!
| California Storage |
I finally stumbled over something that forced me to get my shit together and update my email addresses on you guys.
Its been a strong couple of weeks for the merchant storage business!
First you guys (and FERC) finally put the last nail in CNG and Penn Fuels' coffins on Tioga, then old Larry,John and Dill finally dust off Lodi and get going!
Wow!
I shouldn't have joined the evil empire quite so fast!
Seriously, congratulations on starting construction up in PA.
I ran into my old law partner Hill out in DC last week and got a great update on the recent battles against those drips at CNG and Penn Fuel.
Siggy, what are you going to do without Carol Lynn to fight with?????
Best wishes for continued success!
DF
| California Storage |
I got a call from Tino earlier today (right after our meeting on Pueblo) but could only talk to him for a few minutes before I had to jump off.
I did let him know that Kevin or Lorraine would be calling to talk about info that we need to complete our analysis of the economics.
He also let me know that they are looking at another power plant project in the SW Power Pool and want to discuss with us.
Thanks.
| Pueblo |
Reed and Lana, thanks again for a great stay in the hills!
We all had a blast and I'm happy to report that Britt and Tina are bragging to their little classmates about their newfound skiing prowess!
Next thing you know they'll be starring in a Warren Miller video!
Have a great time in BC and say hi to Brad and Jen for us.
DF
| Thanks! |
Bob, Steve Gilbert was not working on this, but he thought that the numbers in 10ks and annual reports generally get filled in by Elaine Concklin or someone based on ET&S numbers fed up throught the system by Gilbert's group.
For now, I'm leaving the blanks in this draft blank and explaining to Moran that I have limited our review to the legal and regulatory verbiage.
Thanks.
DF
| Enron Form 10-K |
Please take a look at this history of the regulatory issues on Hubbard.
Note that I am still trying to confirm some potentially helpful facts.
I'll walk you through what I think this means on Monday or whenever you have time.
Thanks.
DF
| Draft |
Please find out what you can about which issues FERC is interested in on the Gallup rehearing requests.
I.e., did they issue the tolling order because of our rehearing arguments on the confidentiality issue or SoCal's on the rate discrimination issues?
Anything you learn would be helpful, but this info is not so important that risks should be taken to get it.
Thanks.
DF.
| Gallup |
Here are the draft handouts for tomorrow's meeting with Stan.
Please channel any comments or questions to Steve Kirk so he and Martha can get a final set to me in Houston before the 1:30 meeting.
(Martha--pls get the final version
| The slides |
I'm sure that many of you are aware that there has been a great deal of activity lately related to Enron's evaluation of possible acquisitions.
John Goodpasture's group has kept a large number of ET&S people engaged in looking at a number of potential deals.
While these deal evaluation projects have become routine around here, we all must remember that these projects are extremely confidential.
Even after a potential seller has announced that it is up for sale, the fact that Enron is looking at a potential deal, as well as any of our internal analysis of the deal, remains strictly confidential.
I realize that many of you have ongoing business relationships with employees of some of the companies that we have evaluated or may evaluate in the future.
If you find yourself in such a situation, and a business contact at the target company asks whether Enron is evaluating the contact's company or assets, the only appropriate response is that Enron personnel are not permitted to discuss potential acquisitions.
Please be aware that the confidentiality agreements that we typically sign as part of the acquisition evaluation process preclude any communication by Enron people with employees of the target company.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this requirement, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Thank you for your assistance.
DF
| Confidentiality Regarding Acquisitions |
I'm sure that many of you are aware that there has been a great deal of activity lately related to Enron's evaluation of possible acquisitions.
John Goodpasture's group has kept a large number of ET&S people engaged in looking at a number of potential deals.
While these deal evaluation projects have become routine around here, we all must remember that these projects are extremely confidential.
Even after a potential seller has announced that it is up for sale, the fact that Enron is looking at a potential deal, as well as any of our internal analysis of the deal, remains strictly confidential.
I realize that many of you have ongoing business relationships with employees of some of the companies that we have evaluated or may evaluate in the future.
If you find yourself in such a situation, and a business contact at the target company asks whether Enron is evaluating the contact's company or assets, the only appropriate response is that Enron personnel are not permitted to discuss potential acquisitions.
Please be aware that the confidentiality agreements that we typically sign as part of the acquisition evaluation process preclude any communication by Enron people with employees of the target company.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this requirement, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Thank you for your assistance.
DF
| Confidentiality Regarding Acquisitions |
I'm sure that many of you are aware that there has been a great deal of activity lately related to Enron's evaluation of possible acquisitions.
John Goodpasture's group has kept a large number of ET&S people engaged in looking at a number of potential deals.
While these deal evaluation projects have become routine around here, we all must remember that these projects are extremely confidential.
Even after a potential seller has announced that it is up for sale, the fact that Enron is looking at a potential deal, as well as any of our internal analysis of the deal, remains strictly confidential.
I realize that many of you have ongoing business relationships with employees of some of the companies that we have evaluated or may evaluate in the future.
If you find yourself in such a situation, and a business contact at the target company asks whether Enron is evaluating the contact's company or assets, the only appropriate response is that Enron personnel are not permitted to discuss potential acquisitions.
Please be aware that the confidentiality agreements that we typically sign as part of the acquisition evaluation process preclude any communication by Enron people with employees of the target company.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this requirement, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
Thank you for your assistance.
DF
| Confidentiality Regarding Acquisitions |
Here's the latest Tino-gram: 1.
Tino's environ.
consultants have not discovered any stop signs.
2.
The Isleta is interested in granting Dennis ROW/lease for the power plant as well as the pipeline.
The power plant could be located on Isleta land adjacent to the South boundary of the Scandia reservation.
Thus, the power plant could be connected to DOE's existing powerline infrastructure without ever leaving the Isleta and DOE land.
PNM would not be necessary to move power to DOE.
Unclear to me whether this approach would give the power plant optimal access to the power grid for sales of surplus power.
(maybe this could be done through DOE to an interconnect with PNM on the Scandia reservation?)
3.
Dennis is using Jim Slattery, an ex law partner of mine in DC (and ex Dem.
U.S.
Congressman from Kansas), as his primary contact with Bill Richardson at DOE.
My recollection is that Jim does have a good relationship with Richardson, so this seems very likely to be effective.
Tino reports that "DOE is OK with the deal" and the next step is negotiating the power contract itself.
Tino said that DOE is aware that the capital for the project will not come from the tribe so the tribe's interest will be fairly thin.
It is unclear exactly how much indian ownership Dennis and Slattery promised DOE.
4.
Tino has run into a power plant consultant named Jack Maddox who says he's working on a 230MW plant to be located west of Belen.
Tino thinks he's working for the Laguna tribe, but wanted us to find out who is planning a big power plant out there.
Is this ours?
PNM's?
El Paso?
Finally, the next key step is obviously the economics.
Based on what Tino told me, I'm convinced that Dennis and Tino don't have a real good sense of how much $$$ might be in this deal.
They are groping a bit and our initial analysis of the numbers will likely carry a lot of weight.
How are those efforts coming?
Thanks.
DF
| Pueblo: CONFIDENTIAL |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.